Quote:
Originally Posted by GuidoK
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED
Funny you were willing to take LEOs statement of 35MPH zone as fact all day, but are unwilling to accept their statements human driver most likely would not have been able to avoid.
You show a complete bias in agreeing with LEO statements only when they agree with your opinion.
|
But the first thing is a simple fact, its strange that the police have the maximum speed limit wrong in a press release.
The second one isnt a fact, but a claim. And I'm not disagreeing, I just say that its a bold claim so soon. Usually they only state facts that they have verified, and dont resort to claims. Thats something for the aftermath. But in this case it seems to be the other way round. Not checking facts (or at least that one fact) they release in a press release and make a claim, an assumption.
In the court room you would hear "objection, the officer makes an assumption" or whatever legal phrase they make of it when they hear out an officer.
As for the building, then look at the sign on the building, or the trees around the road or any other detail. It all goes from not/barly visible to well lit.
Lawyers and experts are gonna have a field day in trial, constructing scenarios on the place of the accident, filming with calibrated cameras etc etc. I mean a lawsuit against Uber, everyone chips in with no cure no pay. (because cure=mucho pay). Any living relative (if there are any) will have so much backing.
The only way this doesnt go to court (civil, if there are legal beneficiaries so to speak) is when Uber settles (with millions and millions) |
LEO are considered experts and can enter "opinions" based on their training.